Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Aren't the MacBooks thin enough???

ThisIsMyName

ThisIsMyName

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 11, 2008
154
1
New Jersey
Why would we want something thinner? Most of us would rather have more features rather than just design. And its 1799 and 3000 for something that is a step below the macbooks with only 1.6Ghz and 80 GB, and it doesn't even have a cd drive, so they make you use a different computer.
 
People are addicted to thin. Apple took advantage of that with the new ipod nano and they're now trying out an ultra-portable notebook. I agree though, it doesn't make much sense.
 
You forgot to mention that that 80GB HD is a 1.8" 4200 RPM drive which, is so slow it is almost unusable in a computer. I have dealt with these drives before in 10" Sony laptops, I'd rather have a root canal than one of those in my machine.
 
OMG - It's not just thinner. It's TWO POUNDS lighter (that's significant in daily life for MANY), and has Multi-touch.
 
Muncher said:
People are addicted to thin. Apple took advantage of that with the new ipod nano and they're now trying out an ultra-portable notebook. I agree though, it doesn't make much sense.
Click to expand...

The really interesting thing is that i am 99% positive that the new nano is the exact same thickness as the old nano, it is just wider and shorter.
 
ThisIsMyName said:
And I'm still looking for it.
Click to expand...

You'll need to be more open-minded then.

The MBA isn't meant to be a primary computer to do 3D rendering or anything intensive. Many are keeping their MBP/iMac/MP as their main computer while using the MBA as an ultraportable.
 
ThisIsMyName said:
Why would we want something thinner? Most of us would rather have more features rather than just design. And its 1799 and 3000 for something that is a step below the macbooks with only 1.6Ghz and 80 GB, and it doesn't even have a cd drive, so they make you use a different computer.
Click to expand...

AMEN. Yes, it is smaller and lighter. Yet there is always the glaring fact that you can take a macbook anywhere you can take the air....so that begs the question, what the heck makes it more portable??
 
nikhsub1 said:
You forgot to mention that that 80GB HD is a 1.8" 4200 RPM drive which, is so slow it is almost unusable in a computer.
Click to expand...

Yup. I remember every Apple from the Apple III to the PowerMacs were all just door stops and paper weights because they had HDDs slower then 5400RPM. :rolleyes:

Come one, people. One does not use a MacBook Air to edit HD video or manipulate pictures in RAW format taken on a 10 megapixel SLR any more then one would use a Mac Mini to perform computational fluid dynamics work.

My MacBook air will allow me to browse the internet, receive e-mail, and listen to iTunes/watch AVIs, MP4s and MKVs. It has plenty of power and space to do that and I can open it on a plane or use it on my lap in an airport terminal or lounge.

I have a 17" MacBook Pro and a 24" Al iMac for everything else.
 
To answer your question on the topic heading... No, they're not thin enough. They're 1.08" compared to the MBP's 1.0". So, no, its too thick. :p
 
CWallace said:
Come one, people. One does not use a MacBook Air to edit HD video or manipulate pictures in RAW format taken on a 10 megapixel SLR...
Click to expand...
But you could very easily do that with a macbook, which is the same width and height as the Air, just .25" thicker.

CWallace said:
My MacBook air will allow me to browse the internet, receive e-mail, and listen to iTunes/watch AVIs, MP4s and MKVs. It has plenty of power and space to do that and I can open it on a plane or use it on my lap in an airport terminal or lounge.
Click to expand...
Won't a macbook allow you to do the same? It is the same width and height, the MBA is just .25" thinner. I'm not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand why people think the Air is more portable than the macbook.
 
Look, the point is two-fold:

1. there's been some (not much) pressure from 12" iBook/Powerbook owners to introduce a portable equivalent.

2. By using parts that are already in other Apple-products (ipod/iphone hard-drive, 13 inch (macbook) screen, CPU probably to use for future mobile devices), Apple can profit from future and current economies of scale on the production side (e.g. the more SSDs are used in both the i-products and the MBs, the less it will cost to produce them… over time).

But whether this really gives consumers (from point 1) what they asked for is debatable. I'm not ready to switch from my 12" iBook for this because of the hard-drive alone, and imagine many 12" owners feel the same way.
 
"'The world's thinnest" makes for great headlines and hype, but I think they've made a few too many compromises to get there. Let's keep some perspective here. The thing is on average probably half an inch thinner, which is less than a typical glossy magazine. I'm all for lighter weight, but thinness? It's nice, but it's not something I'm willing to sacrifice half a dozen of features for.
 
It's a selling point. For most people, it won't be enough of a selling point to convince them to buy it over a fully functioning Macbook. For some, it will.
 
I cant grasp this either ok its thinner but the overall dimensions are the same
as most other notebooks, by the time you lug around a optical drive & a external drive because you have no space left on a piddly 80gb internal,it cant
weigh less than my pro, so WHAT makes it more portable???
 
nikhsub1 said:
You forgot to mention that that 80GB HD is a 1.8" 4200 RPM drive which, is so slow it is almost unusable in a computer. I have dealt with these drives before in 10" Sony laptops, I'd rather have a root canal than one of those in my machine.
Click to expand...

its really not that bad...........
 
TheStu said:
The really interesting thing is that i am 99% positive that the new nano is the exact same thickness as the old nano, it is just wider and shorter.
Click to expand...

I think he meant nano relative to mini.

nikhsub1 said:
You forgot to mention that that 80GB HD is a 1.8" 4200 RPM drive which, is so slow it is almost unusable in a computer. I have dealt with these drives before in 10" Sony laptops, I'd rather have a root canal than one of those in my machine.
Click to expand...

And I think you're being a bit too dramatic. I've dealt with a UX180, which uses that same 1.8" drive, and it works fine.
 
Apple will make money on the MacBook Air because there are enough people who just want to feel "cool" and show off how thin their computer is. I think the "show-off" factor is far more significant than any actual increase in utility.
 
K-Funk said:
Apple will make money on the MacBook Air because there are enough people who just want to feel "cool" and show off how thin their computer is. I think the "show-off" factor is far more significant than any actual increase in utility.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of people who like to buy nice things and don't have to worry about the money too much. And many of those don't give a damn whether you or anyone else think it is "cool", they do it to please themselves, not to show off.
 
meagain said:
OMG - It's not just thinner. It's TWO POUNDS lighter (that's significant in daily life for MANY), and has Multi-touch.
Click to expand...

I keep on hearing people talk about how light it is, two pounds is NOTHING. If you think two pounds is a lot of weight you need to hit the gym HARD. I travel a lot and I spend a lot of time in airports and I have never wished for a machine like this. Apple would have been more sucessful introducing a 15" MB IMHO.

I, too, see this as form over function.
 
neil321 said:
I cant grasp this either ok its thinner but the overall dimensions are the same
as most other notebooks, by the time you lug around a optical drive & a external drive because you have no space left on a piddly 80gb internal,it cant
weigh less than my pro, so WHAT makes it more portable???
Click to expand...

well the thing is, I think people won't be carrying an external that often. I.e. for my macbook, I keep all videos and archives on the external so 90 percent of the time its sitting at my desk.

I know from a student perspective the 2lb lost can be a big difference in a backpack when you're carrying other textbooks.

Also every inch can count if you plan on staying on campus all day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back